Client-server Action Synchronisation

Chris, I am severely disappointed that you will not address the so-called "Speed of Light" problem that creates desync. Any developer worth their salt will figure out how to bore a wormhole in space-time to deliver a completely lag-free experience. It seems pretty simple to me!

As a player from planet Saturn, I really mad about this speed of light issue. I really hope Chris do couple of wormholes to prevent me desynching!!!

Just something to the people who support the idea of the 'cluncky system' (the MOBA one cant remember the name)
Can you imagine trying to avoid vaal lasers or smash if there was a 1/4 second delay (most of the time). I would prefer the occasional dysync where I can still see him preparing to smash and can move out of the way, than being caught on the edge of his smash because by the time the computer reacted his animation was pretty much complete.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

ampdecay wrote:

And this is why I'm all for PoE 2 on a new engine :3

Proof of my statement on the previous page.

@amp: Wrong thread, you're thinking Client Performance.

haha you're right too many tabs open >.<

"

Macattackmicmac wrote:

Just something to the people who support the idea of the 'cluncky system' (the MOBA one cant remember the name)
Can you imagine trying to avoid vaal lasers or smash if there was a 1/4 second delay (most of the time). I would prefer the occasional dysync where I can still see him preparing to smash and can move out of the way, than being caught on the edge of his smash because by the time the computer reacted his animation was pretty much complete.

1/4 second is 250ms - this is 5 times more than typical lag

any my current ping to poe servers is around 30ms so it is ~10 times more than reality

funny stuff - you probably are desynced (positionally) more than you think. try typing /oos in a town from time to time. you can desync there too!

"

Hilbert wrote:

Pretty much looks like copy pasted from last manifesto.

I swear I was thinking the same thing, it seems almost word for word lol

"

t_golgari wrote:

"

ignarsoll wrote:

"

UnholyMaster wrote:

I think any ranged attack/cast should be stand-still attack/cast. Yes, SHIFT is the answer, but not all of us use it.

Thanks for pointing this, I totally forgot to mention it.

Desync forces me to always press shift while attacking and it became my playstyle I would highly appreciate a toggle that enables stand still ranged attacks giving my little finger a relief.

A little friendly advice: Don't use the left mouse button for your attack. If you use ANY other button, your char will not run to the target or run to any place if you missed the mob, because all other keys have an auto-shift to the attack, so you will always shoot/hit the place you clicked on.

This isn't true, any and all binds will 'auto run to target' if melee and 'auto line of sight' if ranged, when not shift modified. As long as the game path check allows.

Hm, I know that Diablo 2 worked the same way. But desync appeared very rarely as considerable as it is in PoE often times. Means, if I play every day, desync's that are a whole room difference between Server and Client would only occur 1-2 times a month, maybe less. In PoE it basically happens every day.

Would it be possible to at least try out the RTS variant? From playing RTS I know how bad pings above 250 feel. But with the current system in PoE everyone suffers regardless of his ping. I think it would be better if at least half the people wouldn't suffer. I think it would be great to run a test over 2 weeks or so and gather player feedback. Thouch I can understand it's not feasible from your side to invest so much effort to just test something that might turn out bad.

Hi Chris,

First of all I think you're taking the best approach to address desync.

I do want to add something:

You're saying that option 2: In which the client would always wait for the server would not be a good solutions because "There would always be latency".

At the same time you're saying that "Buying more servers does not help", but you're saying that after excluding the option above.

Now I'm based in Holland and always have a ping of below 50. So my question is, wouldn't it be better to always play with a latency of 50MS instead of a client that responds immediately with a substantial chance for desync?

And if you would go for the second option, wouldn't buying more server in theory help?

I would think that people should prefer more frequent resyncs even though it might mislead them at first, but I can see doing so being a risk. Then again, not doing anything about it is a risk as well.

I do think it would help quite a bit if design of new content considered desync as a reality to work around as well.